Offer and invitation to treat

• Law on offer and invitation to treat

  • Law has drawn a distinction between what is termed an offer and what will be regarded as an invitation to treat
  • Fisher v Bell, Royal Pharmaceutical Society v Boots, Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball
  • This has created confusion as the differences are often very small
• Goods in a shop window

  • they are regarded as being invitations to treat and not offers, this is confusing as it does not reflect what the public believes the law to be
• Goods in a shop window- but

  • fisher v Bell are justified on the grouds the shops must be given the freedom to decide who they enter a contract with or not
  • if displays in a shop were regarded as offers then the shop keeper in the case of Fisher v Bell would have to sell the knife to any person accepting the offer even if they were underage
• Goods on the shop shelf and public belief

  • generally the public believe that in a self service shop the goods on display can be bought there and then or if out of stock they will be provided for them at a later date
  • there is an issue with this as if it were an offer, as soon as they put it in their basket they accept that offer and therefore dont have the choice of putting it back
  • not possible to rectify errors in pricing either
  • in practical terms, invitation to treat appears to be a familiar with lawyers only
• Advertisement and unilateral contracts

  • various pieces of legislations that deal with misleading adverts
  • therefore, under the law adverts are only significant if they actually lead to a contract
  • if this is the case, then the affected party is only left with a claim under misrepresentation
  • Only value left to the outcome of Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball is in reward cases